Posts: 1,219
Threads: 52
Joined: Dec 2014
The mowing of the main roads are contracted out now and they aren't much better than the HPPOA "maintained" shoulders. In places the mowed strip at the intersections is only a foot wide with tall grass leaning over into the road. At those intersections you have to pull way into the road to see what is coming.
Contracting out work is only as effective as the specs and enforcement of the contract, right now, either the specs agreed to are inadequate, or enforcement is non existent.
Posts: 14,083
Threads: 424
Joined: Aug 2012
subdivisions are required to have paved roads
Developer was required to pave roads before County would approve final subdivision plat.
County let Developer evade this responsibility. Too late now.
other roads do not have to be paved to pass code
Code only applies if the road is being accepted by County -- in many cases, not possible, code requires 40-foot pavement on 60-foot easement, which width is not available.
Contracting out work is only as effective as the specs and enforcement of the contract
Same rules apply to County; see above, these roads were supposed to be paved, but this requirement was ineffective due to lack of enforcement.
Posts: 1,252
Threads: 10
Joined: Sep 2014
Contracting out work is only as effective as the specs and enforcement of the contract, right now, either the specs agreed to are inadequate, or enforcement is non existent.
That is right. Inexperienced board, inexperienced GM writing up a contract...it started out from the gate w/the guy mowing 18-24" strips. With the line of sight complaints, the mowing has gone deeper in some areas of the main drags. More than 10' cut back on the main drags is required to get the line of sight at min 35 mph speed limit.
RTSC was trying to get a policy written on line of sight specs so each and every board and GM wouldn't be starting from square 1 but RTSC got shut down before that happened. Those in charge weren't interested in being proactive and progressive. So here we are back to square 1, no policy, and inexperienced people managing our roads.
Trying to save $ and time isn't proactive, isn't about safety. I would think that would be inclusive of the duty of managing our 137 miles of roads. Big responsibility w/the approx 12,000 people living and traveling on HPP roads, not counting those that live outside who travel on our roads.
Posts: 1,252
Threads: 10
Joined: Sep 2014
quote:
Originally posted by kalakoa
what do you believe is the best antidote?
1. Sue developers and County for their collusion in creating this untenable situation; laws were broken when final subdivision plats were approved before the required infrastructure was built. (There is little chance of success here, which is unfortunate.)
2. Replace subdivision boards with a professional services corporation whose only job is to collect money and spend it on necessary/approved projects. Said corporation to exclude any landowners in the subdivision it is contracted to serve, thereby limiting conflicts of interest.
Lately I've considered a related option:
3. Create a "road services corp" as an independent for-hire entity, which (as above) does not include any subdivision landowners.
Many of the recurring problems seem to revolve around "who will control the money/resources", which is (in my opinion) a completely irrelevant issue: money was collected for a stated purpose (roads), lawsuits about control of the money are out-of-scope. (Unless, of course, the lawsuits generate enough paperwork to fill some potholes.)
The joke in Hawaiian Acres is: if you want the road by your house fixed, volunteer for HARC, and you get three years to divert resources towards your house. Sure, HARC gets "free" volunteer officers ... but it would be a better deal for "everyone else" if those resources were directed on the basis of "actual need", with a disinterested third party using a formula to make that determination.
Unfortunately, part of the problem is that these "renegade boards" obsfucate the accounting data ... an audit would be helpful in illustrating the above (eg, how much of your dues was actually spent on road maintenance).
You are spot on regarding the conflict of interest...HPP has had issues of this over the past 2+ yrs in various areas of business.
Yes, an audit would be very helpful in finding out how much of our road dues was actually spent on road maintenance. As a couple of posters have reported on this thread, the Finance Committee (a membership committee) can't even get all the financial information they're entitled to....the big question is why not if there's nothing to hide? 2nd question is what has to be done to get them the information they're entitled to so they can do their job for the membership? They are our only checks and balances.
Posts: 703
Threads: 15
Joined: Jun 2013
Kalakoa writes"Contracting out work is only as effective as the specs and enforcement of the contract, right now, either the specs agreed to are inadequate, or enforcement is non existent."
And Mermaid states "That is right. Inexperienced board, inexperienced GM writing up a contract."
I Agree with both Mermaid and Kalakoa. This is the crux of our problem. The people serving on our Board are not evil, they are just ill equipped to run our 2 million $ corp. We need people experienced in running a Corp. of our size. We need a quorum of experienced people willing to follow our bylaws. Have you read them?
We also need to get real about the funding. Previously paved roads do not last into eternity. Other roads that pose a threat to our Association (liability) need to be addressed.
And of course, our easements need to be maintained. How do we do accomplish these goals with our current road funds? And let us not forget, we have a Bond to pay off....no money left of these borrowed funds......just the debt payment.
If we could start talking about rational approaches to our situation, we would all benefit.
We may be legally right about the County not doing it's job in approving our subdivision without paved roads, but a law suit is long and unpredictable.....Especially unpredictable if that trial were to take place in a county circuit court .
So what next?
Posts: 1,064
Threads: 10
Joined: Aug 2016
We may be legally right about the County not doing it's job in approving our subdivision without paved roads, but a law suit is long and unpredictable.....Especially unpredictable if that trial were to take place in a county circuit court .
No such thing as a county circuit court in this state, they are State courts, but I understand the conflict of interest that you are getting at, and it doesn't go away at the State level. That's why it has to go to Federal court.
Posts: 2,898
Threads: 488
Joined: Mar 2006
How about we just double our yearly maintenance fee to $600.00 a year. I'm willing to pay that to get "all" our roads and easements back on routine maintenance. That's less than $2.00 a day to continue to pay off our debt and get the roads and easements under control.
Posts: 14,083
Threads: 424
Joined: Aug 2012
an audit would be very helpful in finding out how much of our road dues was actually spent on road maintenance
Same goes for County: how was the Fuel Tax spent? Which roads got maintained? If it's not enough, why can't we raise the tax rate?
Posts: 263
Threads: 4
Joined: Sep 2014
quote:
Originally posted by macuu222
How about we just double our yearly maintenance fee to $600.00 a year. I'm willing to pay that to get "all" our roads and easements back on routine maintenance. That's less than $2.00 a day to continue to pay off our debt and get the roads and easements under control.
Respectfully,... No, I not going to say it!
One does not throw more money into a black hole, let alone without demanding an audit.
This situation will not change until us owners get serious and litigate against the association. It is the only way to put the issues on the table so all these conundrums are addressed. We owners need legal counsel at this point. The Board cannot longer be allowed to collect fees without a full audit and total reorganization to address their inability to maintain the roads they were mandated to keep up with our contributions. Nothing will ever get resolved no matter how much we dissect the issue in a web forum. The Board has proven to be totally inadequate to manage the association, there is no more to add to it. No change will ever get implemented unless it is directed by the courts.
What is the other option?, keep paying without questioning and getting nothing in return? Paying a little bit more every year to keep an infrastructure of office staff and a crew that do nothing?, because they do nothing!... Besides collecting a paycheck. A little mowing here and there and then go home when the clock hits 3pm is doing nothing when all our contributions pooled together amount to millions of dollars that must go to road maintenance.
I personally rather we don't have an association and mow my street myself. For crying out loud we already do that once a month for less than a hundred dollars among a dozen neighbors. Been filling potholes as well, and triming overhanging tree limbs that were dripping water onto the road. We have been needing rock for the road for eons, and the last time the office did it was because I dragged the inflated pompous twit of the manager out of the office and basically told him how it should be done and by when. It was pathetic to watch a crew of certified morons grade the road and put down half of the rock it should have been ordered. They do not have a clue how to properly grade a road that is exposed to erosion from heavy downpours. They don't care, manager doesn't care and the board does not listen. They are not accountable because owners have their heads stuck to the ground. In my road we might as well we hire our own grader and split the cost for the rock ourselves instead of paying a useless association that only provides jobs to a pool of lazy and useless staff. We cannot wait any longer.
You cannot fix stupid.
jdo
jdo
Posts: 14,083
Threads: 424
Joined: Aug 2012
keep paying without questioning and getting nothing in return?
You mean like my property taxes? Or were you referring to the fuel tax revenue?
|
